My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-21-99 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1999
>
04-21-99 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2025 11:39:40 AM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:42:43 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
I�BERT ENGSTROM CAMPANIES <br />April 20, 1999 <br />TO: Lake Elmo Mayor Lee Hunt and City Council <br />FROM: Bob Engstrom <br />REF: Amendments for the OP Ordinance <br />Some of the proposed changes may be necessary for the change from open space <br />preservation district to conditional use. Criteria for other changes could include: <br />• Does it make creative development more workable? <br />• Is the open space/rural atmosphere enhanced? <br />• Does the change help the livability for the residents? <br />• Does the change encourage or discourage a cluster/hamlet type of land plan as <br />contrasted to typical suburban sub -divisions? <br />• These changes, if any, should be included in the Comprehensive Plan update. <br />Specific items: <br />D-3- The existing graphics are an embarrassment. <br />E-2- Landscape and land planning design is more important than arbitrary <br />setback requirements. <br />An overall observation is that the OP ordinance provisions were enacted before the <br />advent of the more environmentally sensitive alternative wastewater systems. Also, that <br />proposed changes should examine some of the provisions of the original ordinance. <br />H. Densities - The proposed changes appear to be either ill-conceived or a desire <br />to waste land and to eliminate people. It is likely that the initial zoning district <br />change was in violation of the comprehensive plan requirements of the State <br />of Minnesota Land Planning Act. A further reduction in densities will agitate <br />that problem. The credit for open space development was an incentive to <br />discourage the past practices that were consuming the landscape at an <br />inordinate pace. The credit of one unit for $25,000 or more of Historic <br />preservation is grossly inadequate if the objective is to preserve existing <br />buildings. The secretary of Incentive Standards for Rehabilitation are <br />inappropriate for adaptive re -use of rural buildings. The elimination of the <br />Village Green (which could be more properly called a Common Green) will <br />tend to create more double loaded streets and diminish a sense of community. <br />I. Minimum District Requirements <br />• A townhouse is a single family attached. <br />• Side yard requirements of 15 feet discourages techniques of mitigating <br />the impact of the garages. The original 15 feet requirement was <br />...RESIDENTIAL LAND DEVELOPERS... <br />4801 West 81st Street • Suite 101 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 9 (612) 893-1001 9 Fax (612) 893-1841 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.